Debates of May 6th, 2002

Government Expenditures

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I object to the last term used because it is completely untrue. Nothing has been proven. They are only trying to throw mud.

The EU-Canada meeting is held every year. The Prime Minister of Canada, with the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the minister of trade, meet with their counterparts in the European Community and the leader of the European Community.

The meeting is in Spain this year. I will use the beginning of next week when parliament is not in session to meet with the president of France and the prime ministers of Great Britain and Italy to discuss Kananaskis and a program to help the poorest in the world.

[John Reynolds, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister bristles at the suggestion that his government is corrupt. I would quote the Oxford dictionary, which states “corruption: moral deterioration...widespread”.

Today there are reports that the auditor general has advised the government to call in the RCMP to investigate the government's decision to pay Groupaction three times for a nothing report.

Will the Prime Minister tell Canadians that he will recall Alfonso Gagliano from Denmark so that he can assist the RCMP in clearing up this troubling mess?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it was the minister himself who asked the auditor general to look into that. The auditor general will report this week.

Of course we have always done that. We look at all the problems of the administration, and if somebody has done something wrong that is criminal, of course the RCMP is involved, but I will say at this moment that it is the minister himself who referred that problem to the auditor general and we will see what the auditor general has to report before coming to any conclusion.

[John Reynolds, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the minister asked the auditor general after a slight nudge from the House for a couple of days, and he already has the report so the Prime Minister knows what is in it.

Let me give the Prime Minister some examples of poor management, wrong priorities and, yes, possibly corruption. Let us put aside the bungling on softwood and agriculture. The finance minister has refused to clear up the question of whether his bagman was selling tax policy. His industry minister will not even tell us what one of his high flying staffers does for taxpayers. The RCMP has to clean up smelly deals in public works.

Will the Prime Minister just stay home and get people back working in the industry again and solve these smelly problems in his government?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, he cannot throw mud all the time.

They make accusations based on nothing all the time. We could talk about the opposition, all the flip-flops on Stornoway, for example. They all said to their electors that they would never accept a pension from the government. After the third election, they all flip-flopped to get the cash. They offered a $50,000 payment to have a seat for one of the leaders who had no seat. After that there was $800,000 paid by the taxpayers of Alberta because the then leader of the opposition made a terrible error while he was minister of--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Battlefords--Lloydminster.

[Gerry Ritz, Canadian Alliance, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I guess I would throw it back to the Prime Minister. If he wants to make those kinds of accusations, he can make them outside the House and then we will have some real fun with him.

Consistent poor management and political interference from the front bench of the Liberals have caused millions of tax dollars to be wasted, and it is all self-serving government grandstanding that is paid for. It seems that Groupaction is only the tip of the iceberg. Public works says it has solved the problem, but thanks to its track record nobody believes that line.

Will the Prime Minister listen to the advice of his own auditor general and call in the RCMP to clear up the mess?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure the hon. colleague will want to speak to his House leader and possibly his leader.

This is not the government's auditor general. This is an officer of parliament who was asked by the minister of public works, myself, to do an audit of the situation and I was discussing with his own leader only 15 minutes ago the process by which it will be made public on Wednesday.

[Gerry Ritz, Canadian Alliance, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, if the auditor general is really and truly an officer of parliament, why did the briefing this morning only include cabinet ministers from that side? How were we left out if she answers directly to parliament?

One of the especially odorous examples of the political manipulating under the sponsorship scheme involved the Deputy Prime Minister. He forced public works to spend another $150,000 to advertise how great the government is in Ottawa.

Considering the federal government is the biggest employer, the biggest purchaser, the biggest landlord and the all around biggest presence in the city, I wonder how the government can account for this decision other than to say it is political pork-barrelling.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I have received representations, and I do almost every day in the House after question period, from members of parliament of all sides of the House asking for sponsorships in their own ridings, including the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the New Democrats.

Municipalities

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's task force on urban issues is recommending that the Canadian government develop a strategy to participate actively and directly in municipal development. The Minister of Transport was quick to endorse this report and said that it would be used as a guide by the government.

Does the Prime Minister realize that municipal issues clearly come under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces and that, consequently, any direct involvement by Ottawa would be federal meddling in a provincial jurisdiction?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, many federal programs have been applied to municipalities, for a long time now. The infrastructure programs, for which municipalities are praising us, come to mind. Our problem is that provincial governments, but not municipal governments, are dragging their feet.

It is the same thing with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which for generations has helped cities and the poor by providing affordable housing. It is since the provinces have been more involved than they were in the past that things have not been going so well in the housing sector.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the federal government is trying to interfere at the municipal level, it is because it has money coming out of its ears, it is because there is truly a fiscal imbalance and Ottawa is using it to push Quebec aside.

If the government really wants to show leadership, as claimed by the Minister of Transport, it should give the money to Quebec and the provinces, it should give the means to those who already have the expertise, whether it is in the housing, transportation or municipal infrastructure sector.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we are being criticized for having properly managed the affairs of this country over the past three years. During that period, we also succeeded in reducing taxes. We are doing very well because the economy is doing well.

As recently as Friday, major U.S. institutions said that Canada's situation could not be better. They have ncreased our credit rating. One of the major reasons for this is that they see the Bloc Quebecois and the threat of separation going down.

[Richard Marceau, Bloc, Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in its unhealthy desire for visibility, the government is ignoring a fundamental document, one called the Constitution of Canada. If it took the trouble to read its own constitution, it would see in section 92(8) in black and white that municipal affairs are a provincial jurisdiction.

So why is the government doggedly insisting on getting into things that do not concern it? Why is it that it is constantly seeking confrontation? Why is it always trying to stir up trouble?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the municipalities are the ones asking us to work with them. We have federal jurisdictions that clearly apply anyway; we have responsibilities which clearly apply to those who live in cities.

And since 80% of the population are city-dwellers, we are merely fulfilling our responsibilities.

[Richard Marceau, Bloc, Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, following that same reasoning, 100% of children attend school, so the federal government should deal with education as well. Really now, that argument does not hold water.

Every time the federal government invades an area of provincial jurisdiction, this provokes a confrontation, delays getting the money to where it needs to go, and decreases efficiency.

So, instead of trying to go over the heads of the provinces and of Quebec, why not pay out the money to them via existing channels? That would be so simple.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the folks over there kept telling us for months, years even, that if we transferred manpower to the provincial governments, that would be just wonderful all round.

Now, if one were to go ask the people in the regions whether they were pleased that the federal government has withdrawn in favour of the provincial government, most would say they feel that this transfer was a disaster for recipients of services.

Child Poverty

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, this government's arrogance is disgusting and so are its priorities. Here we have a $40 million a year Liberal propaganda program riddled with political interference and double billing and the auditor general calling for a criminal investigation into government marketing contracts. While the Liberals heap cash on their cronies, poverty among Canadian children increases by 40%. Some Liberal legacy.

Will the Prime Minister put an end to the pork-barrelling and redirect the funds to end the national disgrace of child poverty?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I see the member of parliament getting up today and asking us not to do that, yet she wrote letters to the minister recommending sponsorship in her home town. She should make up her mind about it.

The reality is this program of sponsorship has been extremely good for Canada. In 1995 Canada was drifting. We went to Quebec and told Quebecers all about Canada. Look at the result today. Even the big agencies have said that the government has acted properly and now the danger of separation is much less than it was in 1995

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, what a record of which to be proud. No wonder June Callwood, the highly respected journalist, said today on behalf of Campaign 2000 that the federal Liberal government was either comatose or it was morally bankrupt when it came to child poverty.

What a record: an increase in child poverty of 39%; 1.3 million children in this country living in poverty; 45% of children under the age of six living in poverty today, many of them going to bed hungry.

Is the Prime Minister happy with that Liberal legacy? If not, what will he do about it?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, this government has taken very concrete action to help Canadian children and families, including our national children's agenda, $2.2 billion, and the national child benefit program. We have lengthened the parental benefits under the employment insurance program to 12 months and increased the limit on child care expenses.

In Budget 2001 we added $185 million for programs targeted at aboriginal children. We have cut taxes aimed at low and middle income Canadians. I could go on and on to prove that we have done a lot for children. However we still have a lot to do because we will never be satisfied.

Government Expenditures

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government is paying its friends in Groupaction a million dollars for photocopying. These actions cry out for an RCMP investigation, but they are only one example of a growing pattern of patronage and abuse by the government: the untendered subcontracts to Lafleur Communication; the untendered Challengers; the payments to leadership supporters and the speech writers who do not write speeches; the continuing conflicts of interests; and the Gaglianos shipped out of the country.

Will these be subject to RCMP investigation too?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I expect to report the findings of the auditor general on the Groupaction, which I myself referred to the auditor general, as early as Wednesday of this week.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is the Gagliano response. Any police inquiry would be limited to the notorious abuses that have already been identified.

There is a deeper problem here, a persistent pattern of breaking the rules and rewarding political friends. No one knows how far that pattern reaches and Canadians need to know. The only way is with an independent public inquiry with a full mandate to investigate all practices that may feed or that may hide unethical behaviour or abuse.

Will the Prime Minister name such an independent public inquiry?